Talk:Bambi II/Archive 1

Talkarchivenav

Uneeded Trivia[edit]

The part about a skunk's signature smell is irrelevant and not even really trivia. So Flower uses his skunk smell. Big whoop.

The "trivia" about Faline asking if Bambi remembered her is also not needed. In the original movie, Faline, Thumper, and Flower all ask Bambi if he remembers them. It's obvious that this was used in order to introduce the adult versions of the characters to the audience. If you want to take it literally, then it suggests that Bambi and all his friends have been separated for awhile. The fact is that it's not a very interesting point and shouldn't be considered actual trivia. I doubt that Walt was thinking about the 1 year gap between Faline and Bambi when he decided to introduce them that way.--Linklewtt 07:23, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Should we mention the fictional video nasty mentioned in The Young Ones called "Bambi Goes Crazy Ape Bonkers With His Drill and Sets"? (AndrewAnorak 19:33, 8 February 2007(UTC) Why is the Trivia here at all?"Bambi retures in this movie.Although the Great Prince does not get killed."DUH!Of course Bambi returns!And,if you read Salten's orignal novel,the Great Prince dies of old age,not getting killed.And that happens at the end of the novel,NOT THE MIDDLE!This film obveously takes place IN THE MIDDLE OF WALT DISNEY'S AWESOME CLASSIC!Why they call it "Bambi 2" when it's a midqual is beyond me.My best guess is that they thought "Bambi and the Great Prince of the Forrest"was too long and "Bambi 2"would be okay. This Trivia section should be deleted all together.Anyone disagree?68.220.174.8 (talk) 15:14, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Contrary to popular belief, trivia is not forbidden by Wiki policy. It is simply discouraged in favour of incorporating such facts into the main article. However, barring that, policy is that it is better to have information poorly presented than not presented at all. So, before deleting anything, consider if it could be rewritten and presented in a better format rather than as a loose collection of facts. Lighthope (talk) 22:36, 9 April 2008 (UTC)I'm not saying Trivia itseaf is useless,it's the trivia in this artice that is useless.Maybe we COULD have Trivia in the artice,but it MUST BE USEFUL!!!!! Thank You 68.220.174.75 (talk) 01:20, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Side Bar[edit]

Something needs to be done about the side bar because it has jammed with the text.--Linklewtt 21:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Inappropriate Tone[edit]

2 nitpicks about this page:

1. Its poorly written

2. Is too positive about the movie. Its mostly just a bunch of praise. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.1.228.73 (talk • contribs) 22:41 UTC, February 16, 2006.

I agree. Some parts are well-written, but others seem to be glowing with praise in favor of the movie. Article tagged with Template:Inappropriate tone.Stratadrake 01:35, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm new at this so forgive me if my entry is wierd. I just want to say that I put a lot of those edits in and I feel I had good reson for doing so. to begin with, obviously someone felt my description of Faline's effect on Bambi was not formal enough, as her personality profile was for a time shortened to just "Bambi's love interest." This may sum up her role in the movie in large part, but it really doesn't do her justice. By the way, guess who put the personality profiles there to begin with (and my thanks to whoever it was who added "Man").

I'd be happy to help clean the article when I have more time. Keep up the good work! --Starionwolf 22:47, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Who added that silliness about a Wolf Count, anyway? They were obviously either joking or never saw the movie.

One major problem is the references to fans of the movie saying this or that about different scenes. Fans are not references and should not be included. Also, the tone of some of the entries is very conversational. The entries should be encyclopedic. Also, conversational expressions like "ahh..." should be avoided as well as first person. Some entries are also purely opinion and reading between the lines and formulating hypotheses. This should also be avoided because only the facts the movie presents are true. If wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopedia, opinions should not be in entries.

Count Tunbarr[edit]

To the management: Is there anything you can do to put a stop to this "Count Tunbarr" rubbish? I've seen the movie a dozen times (literally-it's one of my favorites) so I know there is no such character as Count Tunbarr in it. There aren't even any wolves! Obviously whoever keeps posting this silliness either hasn't seen the movie (or at least the U.S. version, in which case they should say which version they are basing this on) or doesn't care about the facts. Letting this continue is really an insult to the accuracy of Wikipedia. I know from past experience trying to post info on an as-yet-unpublished book of mine that all inaccurate or unacceptable posts are deleted posthaste. Bambi 2 is one of my favorite movies, and I've put a lot of time into this page (it was I, "Ben 10" who personally added the Character Bios, the Double-Takes, the Rumors, and the Quotes sections myself, although they have since been added to), and not one of my sections has not been tampered with by this cyber-pest. I really hate to see such a great movie mistreated this way. If you have not done so yet you may wish to watch it when you have the time, so you can better ferret out such misinformation. originally posted by Ben 10 and moved here from main article

I'm not an admin, but all we can really do I think is to warn this person. I seriously doubt their edits are in good faith at this point. The page can also be protected but I think that needs to be taken up with an admin (from my understanding anyway). Blue Phoenix 00:45, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the same guy has been banned twice for doing it. He has even admitted (here and here) that he was blatantly vandalising. Basically, until he is banned forever, we have to keep an eye on this article and revert it when he pulls this nonsense. IrishGuy 08:36, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh joy. Maybe we do need a protected article. Blue Phoenix 23:13, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DON'T call me a cyber-pest. And that's right, I don't care about the facts, and I'm sick of you calling me names behind my back. Keep this up, and you may find yourself in a deeeep problem. Don't keep it up, you'll be okay. 65.103.86.243 P.S. IrishGuy, stop leaving negative messages on my talk page. I'm just 12 years, and I'm a guy.

Thanks for again admitting that you are a blatant vandal. As for the negative comments, it is Wikipedia policy to leave notes to editors when reverting articles or correcting vandalism. Don't want the comments? Stop vandalising. IrishGuy 16:53, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, feel free to bookmark the historic page Count Tunbarr May 16, 2006. This page contains your edits about Count Tunbarr. Thank you for understanding and have a nice day. --Starionwolf 19:26, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I read about what happened over here last year and I deeply commemerate your courageous fforts to restore peace to this article. It must have been very taxing on you to work so hard. I give you my congratulations on how it's all turned out. I once ran across the name of 65.103.86.243, and he wasn't the brightest fellow. I don't know what became of him after that, but I hope he has turned over a new green leaf and moved on with life. Again, congrats with the hard work and happy editing! 65.103.61.154 14:23, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

II versus 2[edit]

Any idea why sometimes this film is called Bambi II and sometimes Bambi 2? --WhiteDragon 19:35, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's because the two are often seen as interchangeable. Since "II" means the same as "2," a lot people use them interchangeably.--Ben 10 17:33, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]